9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (11) TMI 458X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y equipments manufactured on jobwork basis from the appellant herein. We specifically find that the said Swojas has informed and requested the Asst. Collector to forward one of the undertakings to the jurisdictional authorities of the appellants factory. Further we find that they had given a clear undertaking that any duty liability that arises on the dairy equipments manufactured as job work by the appellant, will be discharged by Swojas. On such categorical declaration and undertaking given by Swojas no demand is raised on Swojas. We find that the provisions of Notification No.84/94 are clear when read indicates that if any duty liability that arises on the goods manufactured on job work basis under the said Notification, is to be demand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cheese can, milk tanker falling under Chapter No. 84 of the schedule to Central Excise Tariff Act. An investigation was carried out by the Anti Evasion Branch and they found that appellant herein, in addition to the products manufactured and cleared for themselves were also undertaking jobwork for one M/s Swojas Energy Foods Pvt. Ltd. (Swojas in short) and did not include the value of clearances made to such Swojas and if such value is included, the claim for the benefit of exemption under Notification dated 28.02.1993, is not applicable. Show-cause notice was issued for demanding duty, interest thereof and for proposing to impose penalty. The adjudicating authority after following due process of law confirmed duty liability of ₹ 1,8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... submission that in the absence of any evidence to show that Swojas had filed a declaration to the authorities having jurisdiction over the appellants factory, it cannot be considered that appellant was doing jobwork for Swojas. 6. We have considered the submissions made by the learned D.R and perused the records. 7. The issue that arises our consideration is that whether the value of the jobwork undertaken by the appellant for Swojas is liable to be included in the value of clearances made by the appellant and deny him the benefit of Notification No.1/93 holding appellant as manufacturer. It is undisputed that appellant is manufacturer of various dairy equipments and claims benefit of small scale exemption No. 1/93 and also undertak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
